Page 236 - DPOL201_WESTERN_POLITICAL_THOUGHT_ENGLISH

Western Political Thought

Notes progress in the economic development of society”. Engels did not refer to the Asiatic Mode in The
Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State. It was in the context of discussions on
revolutionary struggles in Russia, that the concept figured once again. Different political strategies
were devised in view of Russia being feudal, semi-capitalist, authoritarian and partly Asiatic. In
1853, Marx and Engels characterized Tsarist Russia as “Semi-Asiatic”. In the Anti Duhring, Engels
viewed the Russia commune as the basis of oriental despotism. Between 1877 and 1882, Marx, in
his letters to Vera Zaulich (1852-1919) and Engels, as a member of the editorial board of
Otechestvenniye Zapiski, examined the prospects of revolution in Russia and whether in such an
eventuality the commune could provide the foundations of socialism.
In exploring the possibilities of a world proletarian revolution, Marx and Engels began to show
interest in the non-European world. The notion of the Asiatic Mode of Production examined the
relevance of Marxist concepts outside the European context. While Marx and Engels were convinced
that socialism represented the zenith of capitalism, and that the proletarian revolution would
break out only in the advanced industrialized societies, they pointed out in 1882 that if a revolution
would break out in Tsarist Russia, it would complement the efforts of the proletariat in the advanced
West.
The Asiatic Mode paradigm undermined Marx’s universalistic presumption that a ruling class
could only be a proprietary class, i.e. a class that owned the means of production. The primary
paradigm in the Manifesto and other writings did not focus on the class character of the state
bureaucracy, which could be one of the reasons why the Asiatic Mode in particular and the theory
of the state in general, remained so sketchy in the works of Marx and Engels.

12.10 Views On India

Analyzing India within the framework of the Asiatic Mode, Marx was convinced that Imperial
Britain would establish the foundations of Western society in India, for English imperialism
represented the only social revolution in Asia. This belief rested on the logic that though colonialism
was brutal, it was dialectically important for the world proletarian revolution. Colonialism would
unleash forces of modernization which would eventually lead to the emancipation of these areas.
Marx’s account of British imperialism led to the proposition that the more extensive the forms of
imperialism, the more profound would be the consequences for modernization. Marx and Engels
favoured colonialism, as it was a catalyst for modernization, though they did take note of regressive
and exploitative side of it.
Marx noted that in India, England had a dual function, one destructive and the other regenerative.
Colonization as a regenerative force brought about political unification, introduced railways, a
free press, a trained army, Western education, rational ways of thinking, and abolished common
land tenures. As for its being destructive, British colonization destroyed indigenous industries
and handicrafts. Marx mentioned the exploitative role played by the East India Company, and the
increasing resentment English capitalists had against its monopoly, preventing the transfer of
surplus British capital to India. All these changes profoundly affected the static nature of Indian
society. In this context, he mentioned superstition and narrow-mindedness, which reinforced
animal worship, preventing development.
In spite of these insights, the fact remained that like the Conservatives, Marx and Engels favoured
colonialism. In the fierce controversy between Marx and Bakunin, the question of the right of self-
determination was one of the major issues of disagreement. Moreover, the Marxist view of the
non-European world and the dominant streams of twentieth-century nationalist thought did not
vindicate the Marxist thesis. Amilcar Cabral (1924-1973) rightly rejected this entire postulate of
history, starting with the emergence of class struggle and the consequent thesis that the continents
of Africa, Asia and America did not have any history before the colonial period. The factor of
nationalism that contributed to the liberation of the colonies was completely ignored by Marx.

230 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY